{"id":11758,"date":"2026-07-25T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-25T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2026\/07\/25\/aymnin-2022-95759-basvuru-numarali-karari\/"},"modified":"2026-07-25T12:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-07-25T12:00:00","slug":"aymnin-2022-95759-basvuru-numarali-karari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2026\/07\/25\/aymnin-2022-95759-basvuru-numarali-karari\/","title":{"rendered":"AYM’nin 2022\/95759 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

<\/strong>T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

<\/strong>ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

<\/strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130<\/strong> B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

<\/strong>KARAR<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

<\/strong>M.<\/strong> Y.<\/strong> BA\u015eVURUSU <\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/95759)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Karar Tarihi: 21\/4\/2026<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

<\/strong>B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130<\/strong> B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

<\/strong>KARAR<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u200b<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n <\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Ba\u015fkan<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

:<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

\u00dcyeler<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

:<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n

Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n

Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n

Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Raport\u00f6r<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

:<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Yunus Emre BA\u011eLAR<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Ba\u015fvurucu<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

:<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Vekili<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

:<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Av. Song\u00fcl KASIRGA<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u200b<\/p>\n

I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 <\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Ba\u015fvuru, ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama (ne bis in idem) ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

A. Ba\u015fvurucu Hakk\u0131ndaki \u0130lk Yarg\u0131lama S\u00fcreci<\/strong><\/p>\n

2. Gaziantep Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda DEA\u015e silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma ve 10\/7\/1953 tarihli ve 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Ate\u015fli Silahlar ve B\u0131\u00e7aklar ile Di\u011fer Aletler Hakk\u0131nda Kanun\u2019a muhalefet su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

3. Kolluk g\u00f6revlilerince tanzim edilen 5\/5\/2016 tarihli tutanakta; 5\/5\/2016 tarihinde yap\u0131lan ihbar \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucunun yap\u0131lan \u00fcst aramas\u0131nda 7,65 mm \u00e7ap\u0131nda, siyah kabzal\u0131, siyah renkli, bir adet tabanca, tabancaya tak\u0131l\u0131 bir adet \u015farj\u00f6r ve \u015farj\u00f6r\u00fcn i\u00e7inde \u00fc\u00e7 adet fi\u015fek ele ge\u00e7irildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

4. Ba\u015fvurucu; soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda emniyette m\u00fcdafi haz\u0131r bulunmadan al\u0131nan 5\/5\/2016 tarihli ifadesinde \u00fczerinden \u00e7\u0131kan silah\u0131 C.\u00d6. isimli ki\u015finin kendisine hediye olarak verdi\u011fini, silah\u0131n \u015farj\u00f6r\u00fcn ve \u00fc\u00e7 adet merminin muhafaza alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131na r\u0131za g\u00f6sterdi\u011fini, daha \u00f6nce tehdit ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in silah ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, silah\u0131 herhangi bir olayda kullanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

5. Ba\u015fvurucu soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda emniyette m\u00fcdafi huzurunda al\u0131nan 6\/5\/2016 tarihli ifadesinde; \u00fczerinden \u00e7\u0131kan silah\u0131 C.\u00d6. isimli ki\u015finin kendisine verdi\u011fini, can g\u00fcvenli\u011fi i\u00e7in bu silah\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, silah\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u015farj\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcn i\u00e7inde \u00fc\u00e7 adet merminin bulundu\u011funu, silah\u0131 hi\u00e7 kullanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

6. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma ve 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019a muhalefet su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 9\/5\/2016 tarihli iddianameyi d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede; ba\u015fvurucuya ait dijital materyaller \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan incelemeye esas tanzim edilen bilirki\u015fi raporunda \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn faaliyetlerine ili\u015fkin bir k\u0131s\u0131m foto\u011fraflar\u0131n tespit edildi\u011fini, silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc DAE\u015e’in \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lar\u0131 \u00fczerine fikir ve ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 benimseyerek \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7lar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda faaliyette bulundu\u011funu, ba\u015fvurucunun \u00fczerinden bir adet 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan tabanca ve \u00fc\u00e7 adet merminin ele ge\u00e7irildi\u011fini g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne bulundurarak \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

7. Yarg\u0131lama tek celsede sonu\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu savunmas\u0131nda “Her ne kadar su\u00e7a konu tabancay\u0131 bana <\/i>[C.nin] verdi\u011fini s\u00f6ylemi\u015fsem de silah bana dedemden kalmad\u0131r.”<\/i> \u015feklinde beyanda bulunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne bilerek yard\u0131m etmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs su\u00e7undan 6 ay 7 g\u00fcn hapis cezas\u0131yla 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’a muhalefet su\u00e7undan ise 10 ay hapis ve 500 TL adli para cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na temyiz kanun yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin gerek\u00e7esi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n

“…<\/i>Kolluk kuvvetleri taraf\u0131ndan DEA\u015e ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00fclkemize y\u00f6nelik faaliyetlerinin ve olas\u0131 ter\u00f6r eylemlerinin \u00f6nlenebilmesi, \u00fclkemiz\/ilimiz \u00fczerinden \u00e7at\u0131\u015fma b\u00f6lgelerine malzeme temin edilen mek\u00e2nlar\u0131n\u0131n takip edilmesi ve ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne eleman\/militan teminine yard\u0131mc\u0131 olan faaliyetlerin engellenmesine y\u00f6nelik yap\u0131lan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalarda; <\/i>Olay tarihinde il emniyet m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yap\u0131lan bir ihbar ile i\u00e7inde san\u0131klar\u0131n bulundu\u011fu ara\u00e7la ilgili \u015f\u00fcpheli hareketlerin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131na ili\u015fkin bildirimde bulunulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine kolluk kuvvetleri taraf\u0131ndan an\u0131lan hususlara ili\u015fkin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu kapsamda yap\u0131lan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar do\u011frultusunda san\u0131klardan M.Y.’\u0131n <\/i>[ba\u015fvurucu] \u00fczerinden bir adet 6136 Say\u0131l\u0131 yasa kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan tabanca ve \u00fc\u00e7 adet merminin ele ge\u00e7irildi\u011fi bu \u015fekilde \u00fczerlerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lar\u0131 i\u015flediklerinden bahisle cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 istemiyle kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <\/i><\/p>\n

San\u0131klardan M.Y.’a ait dijitaller \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan incelemeye esas tanzim edilen bilirki\u015fi raporu incelendi\u011finde; an\u0131lan \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn faaliyetlerine ili\u015fkin bir k\u0131s\u0131m foto\u011fraflar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin tespit yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <\/i><\/p>\n

San\u0131klardan <\/i>[C.\u00d6.den] elde edilen dijital materyaller \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan incelemelerde an\u0131lan ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan TAUH\u0130D kelimesinin bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <\/i><\/p>\n

San\u0131k <\/i>[C.\u00d6.] hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 yasaya muhalefet su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kabul etmedi\u011fi, olay yakalama tutana\u011f\u0131nda su\u00e7a konu sila\u011f\u0131n di\u011fer san\u0131k M. Y.\u0131n yap\u0131lan \u00fcst aramas\u0131nda bulunmas\u0131, toplanan deliller ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fine dair di\u011fer san\u0131\u011f\u0131n atf\u0131 c\u00fcrmi niteli\u011findeki beyan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, san\u0131\u011fn\u0131 cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na yeter, <\/i>her t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u015f\u00fcpheden uzak, kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil bulunmamas\u0131 sebebiyle m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7 sabit olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n CMK’nun 223\/2-e maddesi gere\u011fince beraatine karar verilmi\u015ftir. <\/i><\/p>\n

San\u0131klar hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olmak su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de; San\u0131klar\u0131n siyasi, ideolojik, silahl\u0131 e\u011fitim ald\u0131klar\u0131na, <\/i> ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131na dahil olduklar\u0131na, <\/i>kendilerine bir kod ismi ald\u0131klar\u0131na bu \u015fekilde DEA\u015e ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye oldu\u011funa dair iddia d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na yeter kesin delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak Gaziantep’de di\u011fer san\u0131kla birlikte kiralad\u0131klar\u0131 ara\u00e7la DEA\u015e militanlar\u0131n\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rdan Suriyeye ge\u00e7irmek \u00fczere haz\u0131rl\u0131k yaparken eylemini tamamlayamadan yakaland\u0131klar\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eyleminin silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne bilerek yard\u0131m etmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve san\u0131klar\u0131n <\/i> silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne bilerek yard\u0131m etmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs su\u00e7u s\u00fcbuta ermi\u015ftir. <\/i><\/p>\n

Bu itibarla; San\u0131klar\u0131n silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne bilerek yard\u0131m etmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs su\u00e7undan eylemlerine uyan yasa maddesinin asgari haddi esas al\u0131narak cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, san\u0131klar etkin pi\u015fmanl\u0131k g\u00f6stermedi\u011finden haklar\u0131nda TCK’nun 221 maddesinin tatbikine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na, san\u0131klar\u0131n, hiyerjik yap\u0131s\u0131na dahil olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 yard\u0131m\u0131n niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re cezas\u0131 TCK’nun 220\/7-son c\u00fcmle gere\u011fince 2\/3 oran\u0131nda indirilmesine, san\u0131klara verilen ceza 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 kanunun 5\/1 maddesi gere\u011fince yar\u0131 oran\u0131nda artt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemi te\u015febb\u00fcs a\u015famas\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan cezas\u0131 TCK’nun 35\/2 maddesi gere\u011fince 3\/4 oran\u0131nda indirilmesine, san\u0131klar\u0131n ge\u00e7mi\u015fi, sosyal ili\u015fkileri ve yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecindeki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 lehine takdiri hafifletici neden kabul edilerek 5328 Say\u0131l\u0131 Yasa ile de\u011fi\u015fik 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK\u2019nun 62\/1.maddesi gere\u011fince cezas\u0131ndan takdiren 1\/6 oran\u0131nda indirilmesine, San\u0131k M.Y.’a verilen hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k daha \u00f6nce kas\u0131tl\u0131 su\u00e7tan mahkum oldu\u011fundan hakk\u0131nda CMK 231 maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131na yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ge\u00e7mi\u015fteki hali nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan yeniden su\u00e7 i\u015flemeyece\u011fine dair mahkemede olumlu kanaat has\u0131l olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan verilen cezan\u0131n TCK 51 md uyar\u0131nca ertelenmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, San\u0131k <\/i>[C.\u00d6.ye] verilen hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcresi ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 nazara al\u0131narak san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda CMK’nun 231 maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131na oy birli\u011fiyle karar verilerek <\/i>a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015ftur…”<\/i><\/p>\n

8. Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesi, ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafiinin \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen bir haftal\u0131k s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle temyiz isteminin reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

B. Ba\u015fvurucu Hakk\u0131ndaki \u0130kinci Yarg\u0131lama S\u00fcreci<\/strong><\/p>\n

9. Di\u011fer yandan Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun ayn\u0131 olaya ili\u015fkin 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019a muhalefet su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 16\/6\/2016 tarihli iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede; ba\u015fvurucunun \u00fczerinden tabanca, \u015farj\u00f6r ve mermilerin ele ge\u00e7irildi\u011fini, al\u0131nan kriminal raporunda tabanca ve fi\u015feklerin 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda ta\u015f\u0131nmas\u0131 ve bulundurulmas\u0131 yasak oldu\u011funun tespit edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne bulundurularak \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

10. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fcyle a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, Gaziantep 19. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye ba\u015flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00dc\u00e7 celse s\u00fcren yarg\u0131lama neticesinde Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun ruhsats\u0131z ate\u015fli silahlarla mermileri sat\u0131n alma veya ta\u015f\u0131ma veya bulundurma su\u00e7undan 1 y\u0131l hapis ve 600 TL adli para cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin gerek\u00e7esinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026San\u0131klar\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada, 05.05.2016 tarihli Tutana\u011fa g\u00f6re haber merkezinin <\/i>[\u2026] Kav\u015fa\u011f\u0131nda bulunan <\/i>[\u2026] Lokantas\u0131 \u00f6n\u00fcnde <\/i>[\u2026] plakal\u0131 ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisindeki \u015fah\u0131slar\u0131n \u00fczerinde silah oldu\u011funu bildirmesi \u00fczerine olay yerine gidildi\u011fi, san\u0131k M. Y.’\u0131n <\/i>[ba\u015fvurucu] \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan aramada su\u00e7a konu tabanca ve fi\u015feklerin bulundu\u011fu, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nan savunmas\u0131nda su\u00e7a konu silah\u0131 kendisine di\u011fer san\u0131k <\/i>[C.\u00d6.] n\u00fcn verdi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, san\u0131k <\/i>[C..] nin olay yerinde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, Adana Kriminal Polis Laboratuvar\u0131 M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 16.05.2016 tarihli Uzmanl\u0131k Raporuna g\u00f6re su\u00e7a konu tabancan\u0131n at\u0131\u015f\u0131na mani herhangi bir mekanik ar\u0131zas\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, yap\u0131lan deneme ve mukayese at\u0131\u015flar\u0131nda \u00e7ap ve tipine uygun fi\u015fekleri patlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, su\u00e7a konu fi\u015feklerin \u00e7ap ve tipine uygun silahlarda kullan\u0131lmak \u00fczere imal edildi\u011finin, yap\u0131lan deneme at\u0131\u015flar\u0131nda normal olarak patlad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n, tabanca ve fi\u015feklerin 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 kanuna g\u00f6re yasak niteli\u011fi haiz ate\u015fli silah ve fi\u015feklerden oldu\u011funun tespit edildi\u011fi, san\u0131k Mehmet’in al\u0131nan savunmas\u0131nda silah\u0131n kendisine ait oldu\u011funu, silah\u0131n dedesinden kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, san\u0131k <\/i>[C..] nin kendisini \u015fikayet etti\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc i\u00e7in \u00f6nceki beyan\u0131nda silah\u0131 ondan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, \u015fimdiki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011funu beyan ederek su\u00e7u ikrar etti\u011fi, di\u011fer san\u0131k <\/i>[C..] nin<\/i> ise su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kabul etmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re san\u0131k Mehmet’in ruhsat\u0131 bulunmayan ve 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 yasaya g\u00f6re yasak niteli\u011fi haiz tabanca ve buna ait fi\u015fekleri ta\u015f\u0131yarak \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fi sabit oldu\u011fundan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na\u2026<\/i>\u201d<\/p>\n

11. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda istinaf kanun yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere verilen mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131n\u0131n, istinaf edilmeden 7\/12\/2017 tarihinde kesinle\u015fti\u011fini g\u00f6sterir kesinle\u015fme \u015ferhi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

12. Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 11\/6\/2020 tarihinde karar\u0131n kanun yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Talebin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n

“…<\/i>5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu\u2019nun 223\/7. maddesinde ‘Ayn\u0131 fiil nedeniyle, ayn\u0131 san\u0131k i\u00e7in \u00f6nceden verilmi\u015f bir h\u00fck\u00fcm veya a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir dava varsa davan\u0131n reddine karar verilir.’ h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n <\/i>[ba\u015fvurucu], <\/i>6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019a muhalefet <\/i>su\u00e7undan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda, Gaziantep 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 30\/06\/2016 tarihli ve 2016\/208 esas, 2016\/318 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile mahkumiyetine karar verilmi\u015f olunmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayn\u0131 eylemi sebebiyle Gaziantep Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 16\/06\/2016 tarihli ve 2016\/35029 soru\u015fturma, 2016\/13251 say\u0131l\u0131 iddianamesi ile a\u00e7\u0131lan m\u00fckerrer davan\u0131n, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 223\/7. maddesi gere\u011fince reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken, yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesinde isabet g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir…”<\/i><\/p>\n

13. Yarg\u0131tay 8. Ceza Dairesi (Ceza Dairesi) 4\/10\/2021 tarihinde, konusu ve taraflar\u0131 ayn\u0131 olan su\u00e7un iki ayr\u0131 davaya konu edildi\u011finden bahisle Mahkemenin mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131n\u0131n kanun yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Ceza Dairesinin karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n

\u201c \u2026Dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc M.Y. <\/i>[ba\u015fvurucu] hakk\u0131nda 05.05.2016 tarihinde, Emniyet Haber merkezinden <\/i>[\u2026] kav\u015fa\u011f\u0131nda bulunan <\/i>[\u2026] Lokantas\u0131 \u00f6n\u00fcnde <\/i>[\u2026] plakal\u0131 ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde silahl\u0131 5 \u015fahs\u0131n oldu\u011funun bildirilmesi \u00fczerine ekiplerce olay yerine gidildi\u011fi, \u015f\u00fcpheli M.Y.’\u0131n \u00fczerinden 1 adet <\/i>[…] marka 7,65 mm \u00e7ap\u0131nda siyah kabzeli, siyah renkli, <\/i>[\u2026] seri numaral\u0131 tabanca, 1 adet \u015farj\u00f6r, 3 adet 7,65 mm \u00e7ap\u0131nda MKE ibareli mermi ele ge\u00e7irildi\u011fi olayda; h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan 09.05.2016 tarihli iddianame ile dava a\u00e7\u0131larak Gaziantep 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 2016\/208 Esas 2016\/318 Karar 30.06.2016 tarihli karar\u0131 ile mahkumiyetine karar verilip karar\u0131n temyiz incelemesinde onanarak kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, kanun yarar\u0131na bozma istemine konu olan Gaziantep 19. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince 2016\/481 Esas, 2017\/761 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda ise h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan, 16.06.2016 tarihli iddianame ile dava a\u00e7\u0131larak 2.10.2017 tarihinde h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcn\u00fcn cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi ve karar\u0131n istinaf edilmeksizin kesinle\u015fti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; <\/i><\/p>\n

5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK.n\u0131n 223\/7. maddesinde yer alan “ayn\u0131 fiil nedeniyle, ayn\u0131 san\u0131k i\u00e7in \u00f6nceden verilmi\u015f bir h\u00fck\u00fcm veya a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir dava varsa, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilir.” h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun 13.04.2010 tarih 2010\/1-9 Esas, 2010\/83 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere; konusu ve taraflar\u0131 ayn\u0131 olan su\u00e7un iki ayr\u0131 davaya konu edilmesi halinde, daha sonradan d\u00fczenlenen iddianame ile a\u00e7\u0131lan ikinci kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n, ayn\u0131 eylem nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan m\u00fckerrer dava niteli\u011finde olup a\u00e7\u0131lan bu ikinci kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n CMK.n\u0131n 223\/7. maddesi gere\u011fince reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, kanun yarar\u0131na bozma incelemesine konu edilen Gaziantep 19. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 02.10.2017 tarihli ve 2016\/481 Esas, 2017\/761 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda ayn\u0131 fiil nedeniyle daha sonraki tarihli iddianameyle a\u00e7\u0131lan ve temyiz edilmeden kesinle\u015fen m\u00fckerrer davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde mahkumiyet karar\u0131 verilmesi, <\/i><\/p>\n

Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 ve Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’n\u0131n Kanun Yarar\u0131na Bozma istemine dayal\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ihbarname i\u00e7eri\u011fi bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden Gaziantep 19. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 02.10.2017 tarihli ve 2016\/481 Esas, 2017\/761 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n CMK’n\u0131n 309. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA\u2026\u201d <\/i><\/p>\n

14. Kanun yarar\u0131na bozma sonras\u0131 dava, Mahkemede yeniden g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye ba\u015flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme 21\/9\/2022 tarihinde a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n m\u00fckerrer oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin gerek\u00e7esinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan 09.05.2016 tarihli iddianame ile dava a\u00e7\u0131larak Gaziantep 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 2016\/208 Esas 2016\/318 Karar 30.06.2016 tarihli karar\u0131 ile mahkumiyetine karar verilip karar\u0131n temyiz incelemesinde onanarak kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, kanun yarar\u0131na bozma istemine konu olan Gaziantep 19. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince 2016\/481 Esas, 2017\/761 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131nda ise h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan, 16.06.2016 tarihli iddianame ile dava a\u00e7\u0131larak 02.10.2017 tarihinde h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcn\u00fcn cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi ve karar\u0131n istinaf edilmeksizin kesinle\u015fti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <\/i><\/p>\n

Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK.n\u0131n 223\/7. maddesinde yer alan ‘ayn\u0131 fiil nedeniyle, ayn\u0131 san\u0131k i\u00e7in \u00f6nceden verilmi\u015f bir h\u00fck\u00fcm veya a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir dava varsa, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilir.’ h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun 13.04.2010 tarih 2010\/1-9 Esas, 2010\/83 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere; konusu ve taraflar\u0131 ayn\u0131 olan su\u00e7un iki ayr\u0131 davaya konu edilmesi halinde, daha sonradan d\u00fczenlenen iddianame ile a\u00e7\u0131lan ikinci kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n, ayn\u0131 eylem nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan m\u00fckerrer dava niteli\u011finde olup a\u00e7\u0131lan bu ikinci kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n CMK.n\u0131n 223\/7. maddesi gere\u011fince reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, <\/i><\/p>\n

Gaziantep Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 16\/06\/2016 tarih ve 2016\/13251 esas say\u0131l\u0131 iddianamesi ile san\u0131k M.Y. <\/i>[ba\u015fvurucu] hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131ktan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, su\u00e7 tarihinin 05\/05\/2016 oldu\u011fu, yine ayn\u0131 san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda Gaziantep 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n da 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 yasaya muhalefet oldu\u011fu ve su\u00e7 tarihinin 06\/05\/2016 oldu\u011fu, ayn\u0131 olaya ili\u015fkin m\u00fckerrir iddianame d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi zira her iki iddianamede olay\u0131n anlat\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ayn\u0131 oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan CMK.nun 223\/7. maddesi gere\u011fince davan\u0131n reddine dair a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015ftur\u2026\u201d <\/i><\/p>\n

15. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda verilen davan\u0131n reddi karar\u0131, temyiz edilmeden 11\/10\/2022 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

16. Ba\u015fvurucu, davan\u0131n reddi karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesinin akabinde 20\/10\/2022 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

17. Komisyon taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/strong><\/p>\n

18. Ba\u015fvurucu, daha \u00f6nce yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 eyleme ili\u015fkin olarak yeniden bir yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinin y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi nedeniyle ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

19. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, yap\u0131lacak incelemede Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri ile somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

20. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

21. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

22. Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi’ne ek (7) No.lu Protokol’\u00fcn 4. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi Anayasa’da a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a d\u00fczenlenmemi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6nceleri hukuk devleti ilkesinin temel ilkeleri aras\u0131nda yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul etti\u011fi bu ilkeyi \u00dcnal G\u00f6kp\u0131nar<\/i> ([GK], B. No: 2018\/9115, 27\/3\/2019) karar\u0131nda, hukuk devleti ve hukuki g\u00fcvenlik ilkesi konusundaki kendi i\u00e7tihad\u0131ndan hareketle ve baz\u0131 uluslararas\u0131 hukuk metinlerine referansla Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n bir unsuru olarak g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr (\u00dcnal G\u00f6kp\u0131nar<\/i>, \u00a7 50).<\/p>\n

23. Ki\u015filerin haklar\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen ve kesinle\u015fen bir ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u00fcrecinin ard\u0131ndan tekrar yarg\u0131lanmamalar\u0131n\u0131 veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmamalar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na alan ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi ile adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki cezai s\u00fcre\u00e7ler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki g\u00fcvenli\u011fin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi\u2019ne ek (7) No.lu Protokol\u2019de ayr\u0131 bir hak olarak d\u00fczenlenmesine ra\u011fmen Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131nda bu ilkenin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 \u00f6zel bir g\u00fcvence oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Baz\u0131 uluslararas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde de ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi a\u00e7\u0131k bir bi\u00e7imde adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n bir g\u00fcvencesi olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir (Ford Otomotiv Sanayi A.\u015e.<\/i> [GK], B. No: 2019\/40991, 23\/3\/2023, \u00a7 146; \u00dcnal G\u00f6kp\u0131nar<\/i>, \u00a7 49).<\/p>\n

24. Anayasa Mahkemesi 4\/11\/2021 tarihli ve E.2019\/4, K.2021\/78 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda konuya ili\u015fkin uluslararas\u0131 belgeleri de dikkate alarak ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 yeniden yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesini, hi\u00e7 kimsenin ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda kesin\/kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir h\u00fck\u00fcmle mahk\u00fbm edildi\u011fi ya da beraat etti\u011fi bir fiilden dolay\u0131 ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda yeniden yarg\u0131lanamayaca\u011f\u0131 veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 bi\u00e7iminde tarif etmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu kararda bu ilkeye ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k sonucuna var\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi gereken baz\u0131 ko\u015fullar ceza ile ilgili bir yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinin olmas\u0131, bu s\u00fcrecin kesin\/kesinle\u015fmi\u015f mahk\u00fbmiyet veya beraat h\u00fckm\u00fcyle sonu\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, ceza ile ilgili bir yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinin yeniden i\u015fletilmesi, farkl\u0131 yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinin ayn\u0131 fiile ili\u015fkin olmas\u0131 ve ilkenin istisnalar\u0131ndan birinin olmamas\u0131 \u015feklinde s\u0131ralanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (AYM, E.2019\/4, K.2021\/78, 4\/11\/2021, \u00a7 27; Ford Otomotiv Sanayi A.\u015e<\/i>., \u00a7 147).<\/p>\n

25. Birinci ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ko\u015ful bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u201cceza<\/i>\u201d ile ilgili yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinin her durumda teknik olarak ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 hukuku anlam\u0131nda bir s\u00fcre\u00e7 olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olmas\u0131 \u015fart olmay\u0131p bu kavram anayasal anlamda \u00f6zerk bir yoruma tabidir. Nitekim AYM norm denetimi ve bireysel ba\u015fvuru kararlar\u0131nda, Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. ve 38. maddelerini yorumlayarak \u201cceza\u201d kavram\u0131n\u0131n idari vergi cezalar\u0131n\u0131 da kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir (bkz. AYM, E.2019\/16, K.2019\/15, 14\/3\/2019, \u00a7 13; \u00dcnal G\u00f6kp\u0131nar,<\/i> \u00a7\u00a7 54-56).<\/p>\n

26. \u0130kinci ko\u015ful bak\u0131m\u0131ndan mahk\u00fbmiyet<\/i> ya da beraat<\/i> h\u00fckm\u00fcnden ne anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi AYM taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6zerk olarak yorumlanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin korudu\u011fu menfaat, \u201cceza<\/i>\u201d yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olan bir eyleme ili\u015fkin isnad\u0131n esas\u0131 incelenerek<\/i> ki\u015finin cezai sorumlulu\u011fu hakk\u0131nda olumlu ya da olumsuz verilmi\u015f kesin\/kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir karardan sonra tekrar\/yeniden yarg\u0131lanmamas\u0131 ve cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla \u00f6zerk yorum \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde \u201cceza<\/i>\u201d olarak nitelendirilen bir yapt\u0131r\u0131ma ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131lamada delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve olgular\u0131n tespiti sonras\u0131 ki\u015finin ilgili su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fi ya da i\u015flemedi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7eren bir karar\u0131n ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi anlam\u0131nda mahk\u00fbmiyet ya da beraat karar\u0131 olarak nitelendirilmesi gerekir. Bununla birlikte isnad\u0131n esas\u0131 incelenmeden verilen, ki\u015finin cezai sorumlulu\u011fuyla ilgili tespit i\u00e7ermeyen kararlar, \u00f6rne\u011fin zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 ya da kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar s\u00f6z konusu ilke kapsam\u0131nda beraat karar\u0131 olarak nitelendirilemez (bkz. AYM, E.2019\/4, K.2021\/78, 4\/11\/2021, \u00a7 29).<\/p>\n

27. \u0130lk d\u00f6rt ko\u015fulun birlikte ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi h\u00e2linde ilkeye ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fur. Bununla birlikte uluslararas\u0131 hukukta ilkeye istisna te\u015fkil edebilecek baz\u0131 \u00f6zel durumlar \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bunlar Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n an\u0131lan ilke ba\u011flam\u0131nda yorumunda da dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu kapsamda Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi\u2019ne Ek 7 No.lu Protokol’\u00fcn 4. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer verilen, T\u00fcrk hukukunda kanunlarda kabul edilen yeni delil ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 ve davan\u0131n sonucunu etkileyebilecek esasl\u0131 bir kusurun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ilk iki istisnai durum olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc istisnai durum ise A\u0130HM i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilen (\u015feklen birden fazla olsalar bile) cezaya ili\u015fkin s\u00fcre\u00e7lerin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn par\u00e7alar\u0131 olacak \u015fekilde ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesidir (A\u0130HM, A ve B\/Norve\u00e7<\/i> [BD], B. No: 24130\/11 ve 29758\/11, 15\/11\/2016, \u00a7 130).<\/p>\n

28. Di\u011fer yandan ki\u015fi hakk\u0131nda ikinci kez y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fckerrerli\u011fe ili\u015fkin iddia ve itirazlara h\u0131zl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde cevap vermesi, en k\u0131sa s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131laman\u0131n m\u00fckerrer olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda de\u011ferlendirme yapmas\u0131 ve bu y\u00f6ndeki karar mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131 i\u015fletmesi beklenmelidir. Bu ba\u011flamda ayn\u0131 fiile ili\u015fkin olarak ikinci kez y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen kovu\u015fturmada davan\u0131n m\u00fckerrer oldu\u011funun tespitine ili\u015fkin karar mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131n etkin bir \u015fekilde i\u015fletilmesi, ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 yeniden yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00f6nem arz etmektedir.<\/p>\n

29. Ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 yeniden yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesi, hi\u00e7 kimsenin ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda kesin veya kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir h\u00fck\u00fcmle mahk\u00fbm edildi\u011fi ya da beraat etti\u011fi bir fiilden dolay\u0131 ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda yeniden yarg\u0131lanamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmektedir. Mahk\u00fbmiyet ya da beraat h\u00fckm\u00fcnden ne anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ise ceza yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olan bir eyleme ili\u015fkin isnad\u0131n esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenerek<\/i> ki\u015finin cezai sorumlulu\u011fu hakk\u0131nda olumlu ya da olumsuz verilmi\u015f kesin veya kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir karar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bi\u00e7iminde anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nceden yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ceza ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ayn\u0131 eyleme ili\u015fkin olarak bu cezan\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesinden sonra yeniden bir yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcreci y\u00fcr\u00fcterek ba\u015fvurucunun cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015f ve bu karar\u0131n kanun yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda daha \u00f6nceden yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ceza ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ayn\u0131 eylem nedeniyle ba\u015flat\u0131lan ikinci yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde, m\u00fckerrerli\u011fin tespitine ili\u015fkin karar mekanizmalar\u0131 etkin bir \u015fekilde i\u015fletilmemi\u015ftir. Bu nedenle -somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131nda- ayn\u0131 fiil nedeniyle yeniden yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/strong><\/p>\n

30. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ile 100.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

31. Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan verilen davan\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n niteli\u011fi de g\u00f6zetilerek ihlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

32. Eski h\u00e2le getirme kural\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucuya manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda talebiyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak net 100.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM <\/strong><\/p>\n

A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n

A. Ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n

B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki ayn\u0131 fiilden dolay\u0131 birden fazla yarg\u0131lanmama veya cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmama ilkesinin \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

C. Ba\u015fvurucuya net 100.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

\u00c7. 40.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

D. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n

E. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 21\/4\/2026 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n

\n <\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR M. Y. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/95759) Karar Tarihi: 21\/4\/2026 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR \u200b Ba\u015fkan : \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ Selahaddin MENTE\u015e Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Yunus Emre BA\u011eLAR Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Song\u00fcl KASIRGA \u200b I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, ayn\u0131 fiilden…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11759,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11758","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-diger"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11758","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11758"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11758\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11759"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11758"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11758"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11758"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}